Gotta believe Palmer isnt messin around. Never heard him say anything since he's been there. he's a west coast guy and is got to be tired of cinci. bungles will have to take a QB IMO, leaving the Browns in a wonderful spot. And with the guys we have making the decisions we are in a win-win here. But if Peterson is there you got to take him...right?

The radio show this morning in Columbus quoted him as saying something along the lines of, " I have 80 million in the bank so I don't have to play for money. I want to play for the love of the game now"

I'm not sure if Cincy's need for a QB affects the Browns' ability to trade down from 6. If Cincy doesn't take a QB at #4, I doubt the Browns will want to trade all the way back to Cincy's 2nd Rounder. Unless I'm missing your point...

I think Cincy will do everything they can to get Cam Newton. If Buffalo or Carolina takes Newton, then Cincy might take Gabbert if they deem him worthy (I don't know why they would - Gabbert is pretty damn ordinary as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that's why they make the big bucks).

I doubt anyone's scrambling to trade up for Gabby, but I've been wrong before.

Looking at the draft order (Carolina, Denver, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona) ahead of Cleveland, I have decided once and for all that Cam Newton has a 100% chance of being gone by #6, and the Cam debate can cease forevermore.

hiko wrote:I'm not sure if Cincy's need for a QB affects the Browns' ability to trade down from 6. If Cincy doesn't take a QB at #4, I doubt the Browns will want to trade all the way back to Cincy's 2nd Rounder. Unless I'm missing your point...

I think Cincy will do everything they can to get Cam Newton. If Buffalo or Carolina takes Newton, then Cincy might take Gabbert if they deem him worthy (I don't know why they would - Gabbert is pretty damn ordinary as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that's why they make the big bucks).

I doubt anyone's scrambling to trade up for Gabby, but I've been wrong before.

Looking at the draft order (Carolina, Denver, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona) ahead of Cleveland, I have decided once and for all that Cam Newton has a 100% chance of being gone by #6, and the Cam debate can cease forevermore.

It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

peeker643 wrote:It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

Not only that, but the Browns NEED to get as many picks as possible to be able to at least hit on 3 guys in this draft.

In a hypothetical trade down scenario, this means the Browns likely pick up another 2nd rounder, 3 picks in the top 50 in the draft.

You may not get the better rated player at 11, but the odds play better in your favor you'll be able to hit on the three target you have set out for.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

peeker643 wrote:It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

I hear ya, but I think there's only a couple guys that are so head-and-shoulders better than the other guys at their position that someone would jump up to draft them - like Cam Newton or Pat Peterson. I really doubt Newton falls to #6, and if Peterson does, you probably just go ahead and take him (unless they offer a monster deal).

Green? Maybe, but I think a lot of teams will figure fuck it and take option 1A Julio Jones instead.

hiko wrote:I'm not sure if Cincy's need for a QB affects the Browns' ability to trade down from 6. If Cincy doesn't take a QB at #4, I doubt the Browns will want to trade all the way back to Cincy's 2nd Rounder. Unless I'm missing your point...

I think Cincy will do everything they can to get Cam Newton. If Buffalo or Carolina takes Newton, then Cincy might take Gabbert if they deem him worthy (I don't know why they would - Gabbert is pretty damn ordinary as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that's why they make the big bucks).

I doubt anyone's scrambling to trade up for Gabby, but I've been wrong before.

Looking at the draft order (Carolina, Denver, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona) ahead of Cleveland, I have decided once and for all that Cam Newton has a 100% chance of being gone by #6, and the Cam debate can cease forevermore.

It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

What would it take for you to trade out of that spot. Say you are trading down from #6 to #15 (Miami). Is Miami's 2nd round pick enough? I wouldn't think so. Miami's 2nd and 3rd? Maybe I guess. Miamis 2012 1st and 2011 3rd? It would be nice to pick up another first, but I hate to lose value in this loaded draft. I think it's going to be tough to work out deals this year without players involved (only picks) due to the CBA.

If Miami was trading up it would probably be to get one of the QBs (Cam or Gabby) if the other one went in the top five. In that case the Browns should definitely ask for more than a second round pick. This would be almost the identical trade the Browns made with the Jets for the Mark Sanchez pick. The Browns went from 5 to 17, got the Jets second rounder, a couple of average players and a project QB. In this case we can't ask for Miami players (not that Heckert would want them like Mangini wanted his former Jets) so we would have to get more than just Miami's 2nd round pick.

At this point it looks like Mangy let the Jets off easy in the Sanchez deal, so I trust Heckert will be looking for a 2nd and 3rd from Miami or maybe their 1st next year in addition to the #15.

My buddy who's a Bengals fan thinks the Bengals will trade Palmer if they have to and then trade with the Eagles for Kevin Kolb. That's another legitimate option if they're not comfortable with Cam or Gabby at #4. After Newton's comments about wanting to be an "icon" and then his erratic performance at the Combine it seems nobody is really sure if he'll go in the top five or drop to Minnesota at #12.

hiko wrote:I'm not sure if Cincy's need for a QB affects the Browns' ability to trade down from 6. If Cincy doesn't take a QB at #4, I doubt the Browns will want to trade all the way back to Cincy's 2nd Rounder. Unless I'm missing your point...

I think Cincy will do everything they can to get Cam Newton. If Buffalo or Carolina takes Newton, then Cincy might take Gabbert if they deem him worthy (I don't know why they would - Gabbert is pretty damn ordinary as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that's why they make the big bucks).

I doubt anyone's scrambling to trade up for Gabby, but I've been wrong before.

Looking at the draft order (Carolina, Denver, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona) ahead of Cleveland, I have decided once and for all that Cam Newton has a 100% chance of being gone by #6, and the Cam debate can cease forevermore.

It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

What would it take for you to trade out of that spot. Say you are trading down from #6 to #15 (Miami). Is Miami's 2nd round pick enough? I wouldn't think so. Miami's 2nd and 3rd? Maybe I guess. Miamis 2012 1st and 2011 3rd? It would be nice to pick up another first, but I hate to lose value in this loaded draft. I think it's going to be tough to work out deals this year without players involved (only picks) due to the CBA.

Rd1 6th Pick is worth 1600 so you need to get close to that in future value if not better. Granted, that does you little good once players are thrown into the deal.

Miami has the 15th pick or close which has a value of ~1000. So Miami would need to make up an additional ~600 points in picks.

The numbers aren't exact but this is approx how they assign value to a specific pick for trade purposes.

Prosecutor would be real close to being right in this case. Miami's 1st, 2nd and 3rd would be approximately worth the Browns 1st rd spot (if Miami actually has 2nd and 3rd rd picks and they aren't flipping w/another team each round due to identical records, etc).

As for trade down? Don't see it. This organization doesn't lean that way. They trade up. It isn't about quantity. We don't need 3 so-so skilled prospects or more Alex Mack's; studs at non impact positions. It is about playmakers to the,. Speed. Weapons. Diference makers.

They won't watch them go elsewhere. If Cincy goes Gabbert, I think AJ is a Brown.

jb wrote:IMO it puts AJ in play. I thought he was certain to go to Cincy.

Then it will be up to whether they want the WR or DLman.

Heckert's call.

I agree. I get more turned around every day though. Draft is deep enough to go DL-DL in rounds 1 and 2 or WR-WR in 1 and 2 and really upgrade either spot. Wondering if they'll split the baby and go DL-WR or what.

jb wrote:IMO it puts AJ in play. I thought he was certain to go to Cincy.

Then it will be up to whether they want the WR or DLman.

Heckert's call.

I agree. I get more turned around every day though. Draft is deep enough to go DL-DL in rounds 1 and 2 or WR-WR in 1 and 2 and really upgrade either spot. Wondering if they'll split the baby and go DL-WR or what.

Two more months of this.

DL is Mariana's deep this year Peeker. Granted, they aren't fairly or Darius down there, but Jared Crick can ball, and there's other DT's that are rated solidly.

Prosecutor wrote:My buddy who's a Bengals fan thinks the Bengals will trade Palmer if they have to and then trade with the Eagles for Kevin Kolb. That's another legitimate option if they're not comfortable with Cam or Gabby at #4. After Newton's comments about wanting to be an "icon" and then his erratic performance at the Combine it seems nobody is really sure if he'll go in the top five or drop to Minnesota at #12.

When? They'd better do it in a damn hurry. Cuz as of Thursday at midnight (or is it Friday?) there won't be any player movement anywhere.

I also think we're forgetting that b/c there will be no player movement, teams that might be interested in getting a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever won't be able to get a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever, and sitting there in the draft having no idea whether or not (or when) they might able to trade for a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever or end up fucked without vaseline... well, I think that makes drafting a QB much more enticing.

Carolina, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona, San Fran, Tennessee, Washington all will seriously consider QB's... and that's just the Top 10.

I guarantee Cam Newton goes in the Top 5, bad interviews or no. And I'd be Shocked if Gabby didn't go in the Top 10 too. If you don't have a Franchise QB, you need one.

Prosecutor wrote:My buddy who's a Bengals fan thinks the Bengals will trade Palmer if they have to and then trade with the Eagles for Kevin Kolb. That's another legitimate option if they're not comfortable with Cam or Gabby at #4. After Newton's comments about wanting to be an "icon" and then his erratic performance at the Combine it seems nobody is really sure if he'll go in the top five or drop to Minnesota at #12.

When? They'd better do it in a damn hurry. Cuz as of Thursday at midnight (or is it Friday?) there won't be any player movement anywhere.

I also think we're forgetting that b/c there will be no player movement, teams that might be interested in getting a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever won't be able to get a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever, and sitting there in the draft having no idea whether or not (or when) they might able to trade for a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever or end up fucked without vaseline... well, I think that makes drafting a QB much more enticing.

Carolina, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona, San Fran, Tennessee, Washington all will seriously consider QB's... and that's just the Top 10.

I guarantee Cam Newton goes in the Top 5, bad interviews or no. And I'd be Shocked if Gabby didn't go in the Top 10 too. If you don't have a Franchise QB, you need one.

I don't think Denver is sold on Orton either. Wouldn't shock me if they were looking QB. That said, is there any way that Patick Peterson falls to #6 at all? If Buff/Cin take Gabbert and Cam does Peterson get by Denver? Denver is switching to a 4-3 as well and may want best DL available to help Dumervil and they did just re-sign Champ Bailey.

Prosecutor wrote:My buddy who's a Bengals fan thinks the Bengals will trade Palmer if they have to and then trade with the Eagles for Kevin Kolb. That's another legitimate option if they're not comfortable with Cam or Gabby at #4. After Newton's comments about wanting to be an "icon" and then his erratic performance at the Combine it seems nobody is really sure if he'll go in the top five or drop to Minnesota at #12.

When? They'd better do it in a damn hurry. Cuz as of Thursday at midnight (or is it Friday?) there won't be any player movement anywhere.

I also think we're forgetting that b/c there will be no player movement, teams that might be interested in getting a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever won't be able to get a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever, and sitting there in the draft having no idea whether or not (or when) they might able to trade for a Palmer/Kolb/Whomever or end up fucked without vaseline... well, I think that makes drafting a QB much more enticing.

Carolina, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona, San Fran, Tennessee, Washington all will seriously consider QB's... and that's just the Top 10.

I guarantee Cam Newton goes in the Top 5, bad interviews or no. And I'd be Shocked if Gabby didn't go in the Top 10 too. If you don't have a Franchise QB, you need one.

I don't think Denver is sold on Orton either. Wouldn't shock me if they were looking QB. That said, is there any way that Patick Peterson falls to #6 at all? If Buff/Cin take Gabbert and Cam does Peterson get by Denver? Denver is switching to a 4-3 as well and may want best DL available to help Dumervil and they did just re-sign Champ Bailey.

hiko wrote:I'm not sure if Cincy's need for a QB affects the Browns' ability to trade down from 6. If Cincy doesn't take a QB at #4, I doubt the Browns will want to trade all the way back to Cincy's 2nd Rounder. Unless I'm missing your point...

I think Cincy will do everything they can to get Cam Newton. If Buffalo or Carolina takes Newton, then Cincy might take Gabbert if they deem him worthy (I don't know why they would - Gabbert is pretty damn ordinary as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that's why they make the big bucks).

I doubt anyone's scrambling to trade up for Gabby, but I've been wrong before.

Looking at the draft order (Carolina, Denver, Buffalo, Cincy, Arizona) ahead of Cleveland, I have decided once and for all that Cam Newton has a 100% chance of being gone by #6, and the Cam debate can cease forevermore.

It could drop a guy like AJ Green to 6th and I'd have no issue dropping back to 10-15 and taking Julio Jones plus a couple extra picks.

Change AJ Green to Dareus or Fairley or whomever and substitute JJ Watt or Mark Ingram and picks.

You get the idea. It also drops one more player to your pick at #37 as well.

What would it take for you to trade out of that spot. Say you are trading down from #6 to #15 (Miami). Is Miami's 2nd round pick enough? I wouldn't think so. Miami's 2nd and 3rd? Maybe I guess. Miamis 2012 1st and 2011 3rd? It would be nice to pick up another first, but I hate to lose value in this loaded draft. I think it's going to be tough to work out deals this year without players involved (only picks) due to the CBA.

Rd1 6th Pick is worth 1600 so you need to get close to that in future value if not better. Granted, that does you little good once players are thrown into the deal.

Miami has the 15th pick or close which has a value of ~1000. So Miami would need to make up an additional ~600 points in picks.

The numbers aren't exact but this is approx how they assign value to a specific pick for trade purposes.

Prosecutor would be real close to being right in this case. Miami's 1st, 2nd and 3rd would be approximately worth the Browns 1st rd spot (if Miami actually has 2nd and 3rd rd picks and they aren't flipping w/another team each round due to identical records, etc).

I actually looked up that chart right before I posted. If that's what they use, that's what they use, I guess. It just seems like a 2nd and 3rd isn't much to gain to drop out of the top 6 into the middle of the first. I wonder how accurate it is.

Id be interested to see someone do the calculations for trades in the previous 5-10 drafts. I'd also like to know what a next years first is worth. I've heard that a next years 1st is worth a current years second, but I don't know how they determine more specifically.

I'm also trying to figure out if the Browns got fucked worse in the Winslow Jr trade up, or the Brady Quinn trade up from a draft position value standpoint.

I agree with MS that we should get more than a 2nd and 3rd for dropping to #15, even if that's what the chart dictates. In the Sanchez deal we went from #5 to #17, got the 2nd round pick plus Elam and Coleman (I'm not counting Ratliff). I believe we should have gotten more but Mangenius had a hard-on for his boys. If Elam and Coleman together are worth a 3rd round pick, then we should get more than that. How much more I can't say, maybe a 2nd rounder next year.

As for Loo's contention that we need to come out of the draft with one of the 8 or 9 "elite" players, that's hard to argue with. But if we were to trade down to #15 and get Watt or Kerrigan and could pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd and maybe more, wouldn't you have to consider it? Is the difference between Fairley and Watt/Kerrigan worth giving up Miami's 2nd and 3rd round pick?

We're using Miami as an example here but it could be several other teams like Washington or Minny that might want to jump ahead of San Francisco to get that last remaining blue chip QB.

Prosecutor wrote:I agree with MS that we should get more than a 2nd and 3rd for dropping to #15, even if that's what the chart dictates. In the Sanchez deal we went from #5 to #17, got the 2nd round pick plus Elam and Coleman (I'm not counting Ratliff). I believe we should have gotten more but Mangenius had a hard-on for his boys. If Elam and Coleman together are worth a 3rd round pick, then we should get more than that. How much more I can't say, maybe a 2nd rounder next year.

As for Loo's contention that we need to come out of the draft with one of the 8 or 9 "elite" players, that's hard to argue with. But if we were to trade down to #15 and get Watt or Kerrigan and could pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd and maybe more, wouldn't you have to consider it? Is the difference between Fairley and Watt/Kerrigan worth giving up Miami's 2nd and 3rd round pick?

We're using Miami as an example here but it could be several other teams like Washington or Minny that might want to jump ahead of San Francisco to get that last remaining blue chip QB.

I'd personally rather look the other way as JB suggested. Take the blue chip with #6 and then see if you can move up for another 2nd round pick in addition to your own #37.

That would likely cost your 2nd and 3rd next year (not sure where new England's two picks in RD2 are but they have two in each of the first four rounds).

peeker643 wrote:I'd personally rather look the other way as JB suggested. Take the blue chip with #6 and then see if you can move up for another 2nd round pick in addition to your own #37.

That would likely cost your 2nd and 3rd next year (not sure where new England's two picks in RD2 are but they have two in each of the first four rounds).

Yeah, I'm with that.

Exploring the possible compensation in trade down scenarios according to the chart leaves me decidedly underwhelmed. I'm not leaving Peterson, Dareus, Fairley, etc on the board in order to pick up a second and third. I'd have to be overwhelmed with an offer I couldn't refuse, and I have no idea why anyone would offer that (unless Cam dropped, then all bets are off)

BUT

If you are offered an extra second and 3rd to trade down to #12/13 area...AND...the guy you are targeting at #6 is in fact AJ Green, don't you have to consider that, if you think Jones would still be available? Or is the difference between Green and Jones greater than an extra 2nd and 3rd?

Of course, there's the risk that someone else fucks up the plan by taking Jones.

I just think that if you are targeting Green, the idea of trading down is more palatable.

peeker643 wrote:I'd personally rather look the other way as JB suggested. Take the blue chip with #6 and then see if you can move up for another 2nd round pick in addition to your own #37.

That would likely cost your 2nd and 3rd next year (not sure where new England's two picks in RD2 are but they have two in each of the first four rounds).

Yeah, I'm with that.

Exploring the possible compensation in trade down scenarios according to the chart leaves me decidedly underwhelmed. I'm not leaving Peterson, Dareus, Fairley, etc on the board in order to pick up a second and third. I'd have to be overwhelmed with an offer I couldn't refuse, and I have no idea why anyone would offer that (unless Cam dropped, then all bets are off)

BUT

If you are offered an extra second and 3rd to trade down to #12/13 area...AND...the guy you are targeting at #6 is in fact AJ Green, don't you have to consider that, if you think Jones would still be available? Or is the difference between Green and Jones greater than an extra 2nd and 3rd?

Of course, there's the risk that someone else fucks up the plan by taking Jones.

I just think that if you are targeting Green, the idea of trading down is more palatable.

If you are targeting Peterson or Fairley, I'd keep the pick.

Absolutely. I think you clearly have to consider that.

I do have to wonder though, given the work stoppage and likely lack of free agency, are a lot of teams going to be drafting more for need this April than for best guy on the board because that's the only way to fill that need?

This is something JTA1975 has convinced me of. Give me a player that's been dominant and prominent at each level thy've played. AJ Green, Julio Jones, Dareus, Quinn, Peterson, et al. Fairley had a HUGE year, no doubt. But I don't trust that to continue like I do a guy that's done it under pressure for 6-8 years. Not saying it won't, just that there seem to be guys who ar close to that in talent and don't have the 'bust' factor that I fear of Fairley.

Looking at the way the suspension didn't cost Quinn/Austin much in terms of draft status, wonder what it did to Greg Little at UNC. Another 6'2" 215lb receiver who had a nice junior year after switching from RB.

Prosecutor wrote:I agree with MS that we should get more than a 2nd and 3rd for dropping to #15, even if that's what the chart dictates. In the Sanchez deal we went from #5 to #17, got the 2nd round pick plus Elam and Coleman (I'm not counting Ratliff). I believe we should have gotten more but Mangenius had a hard-on for his boys. If Elam and Coleman together are worth a 3rd round pick, then we should get more than that. How much more I can't say, maybe a 2nd rounder next year.

As for Loo's contention that we need to come out of the draft with one of the 8 or 9 "elite" players, that's hard to argue with. But if we were to trade down to #15 and get Watt or Kerrigan and could pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd and maybe more, wouldn't you have to consider it? Is the difference between Fairley and Watt/Kerrigan worth giving up Miami's 2nd and 3rd round pick?

We're using Miami as an example here but it could be several other teams like Washington or Minny that might want to jump ahead of San Francisco to get that last remaining blue chip QB.

I'd personally rather look the other way as JB suggested. Take the blue chip with #6 and then see if you can move up for another 2nd round pick in addition to your own #37.

That would likely cost your 2nd and 3rd next year (not sure where new England's two picks in RD2 are but they have two in each of the first four rounds).

That's also an option, especially if you are committed to getting an impact player at #6. New England is always looking to trade for future picks.

Personally I'm not inclined to trade up this year because we need more players than we have draft picks with the shift to the 4-3 and the age on defense, which has already resulted in the loss of Coleman and Rogers. We also have some unrestricted free agents on defense like Jackson, Roth, and Eric Wright, who might all be gone. It just seems like this is a year to trade down and get more picks if we can. They want to add youth and speed to the roster and getting an extra pick or two would help.

It's a gamble to trade next year's picks because we don't know how high the Browns will be drafting next year. That being said, if a guy the Browns really love drops into the 2nd round they might just make a move. Savage did that with Eric Wright, but this is a different administration. Last year the Eagles had something like 13 picks, so that tells me they like to trade down for future picks like Belichick and Pioli.

Esiason, the franchise quarterback who successfully asked for a trade from Bengals president Mike Brown when Carson Palmer was in junior high, understands where Palmer is coming from. He also says Palmer might have to do what he did and wait a year while the Bengals find the next guy.

Esiason, still one of the NFL's most recognizable figures as a CBS studio analyst, recalled Tuesday how the Christmas Eve 1991 departure of head coach Sam Wyche spurred his desire to leave. Esiason kept it quiet, but he called Brown that night and kept calling.

"Mike Brown's not going to budge unless he gets an unbelievable offer," Esiason said. "It worked out perfectly for me the way the cards fell. People forget, but David Klinger was the guy coming out of the (1992) draft and then the next year Mike not only traded me to the Jets, but back to my offensive coordinator (Bruce Coslet). Of course, a change of scenery doesn't always mean it's better."

Next year, Palmer will be the same age when Esiason was traded (32) and Esiason understands even though he says Palmer has never called him for counsel on the subject. But Esiason sees what Palmer sees. In the same division, younger quarterbacks such as the Steelers' Ben Roethlisberger have been to three Super Bowls and the Ravens' Joe Flacco to three playoffs in his first three seasons.

"I'm sure he's frustrated. Maybe he looks at the division and sees two strong teams and figures the Bengals are going to be behind the 8-ball for the next five, six years," Esiason said. "I saw it differently. I had just lost my offensive coordinator (Coslet). We weren't active in Plan B free agency and became good at losing players. And as much as Sam and I got into it sometimes, I loved what he allowed me to do in the no-huddle. I didn't want to learn a new offense again there, although David (Shula) kept the same one. The Jets were going out into free agency and making a play and the Bengals were going through transition, and it seems like they've been doing that since l left."

There is one big difference between now and 1992. Esiason's demand didn't become public until about 10 years later. This one went viral a week after the meeting in 2011 fashion and he admits Brown doesn't like to be backed into anything. He still thinks Palmer could come back for a year given that the civility is intact, but he says the Bengals have time to sift through the draft and find a quarterback. He points to rookie QBs like Sam Bradford, Matthew Stafford and Colt McCoy playing right away.

"That's what a lot of teams are doing right now," Esiason said. "There's still a lot of time left before the draft. Both sides are going to have to figure it out."

After going from ripped in 1987 to revered in 1988, Esiason doesn't think Palmer's public trade demand precludes a return.

"If I could do that in one year, anybody can," Esiason said. "All the fans care about is if you win. And Bengals fans have frustrations, and they take it out on the quarterback. Ask Ken Anderson. I got booed. It happens to everybody.""

jta1975 wrote:Mike Brown will be the dumbest Exec of all time if he doesn't get something for him. I truly believe Palmer and there is now way in the world you want the QB of your team to be the rotten apple.

Give to get for the future. Get rid of him and go get Kolb. If he doesn't find a way to get a new fresh QB excited about having a gig. The Bengals won't recover any time soon.

Palmer's play in recent years won't net a first round pick. Get that out of his head and move on. Give a two and three to Eagles and get a 2 and 5 from Arizona and build.

One day, when the Bengals have facilities better than the Bearcats, they might be able to actually build a franchise. They're the KC Royals of the NFL.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team